I'm not saying it's worth $200K, but those of you trying to make it seem like no way of discerning median from bottom of the class at HYS vs. good a old fashioned 4.0 GPA scale isn't a big deal are either crazy or 0Ls. It's a huge freaking deal. It basically means you can't end up in a situation where you absolutely cannot get a job immediately after graduation. It's the most important thing in law school period. What exactly do you think would be more important in determining what school to attend?

The other big thing, that many people are brushing over, is that it makes a huge difference if you don't want to work in NYC. Again I wouldn't pay $200k for it but your ability to go somewhere like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Chicago (obviously not for UChicago), Florida, Seattle, Charlotte etc. is going to decrease big time by going to "CCN" over HYS. A lot of secondary markets don't even give you a boost for attending "CCN" over another top 14--especially if the region has a top 14 nearby. Actually DC falls into that category as well although it's still not easy from HYS.

BruceWayne wrote:I'm not saying it's worth $200K, but those of you trying to make it seem like no way of discerning median from bottom of the class at HYS vs. good a old fashioned 4.0 GPA scale isn't a big deal are either crazy or 0Ls. It's a huge freaking deal. It basically means you can't end up in a situation where you absolutely cannot get a job immediately after graduation. It's the most important thing in law school period. What exactly do you think would be more important in determining what school to attend?

It works the same way at Columbia with profs required to give nothing below a B. We've also got a thread in the employment forum with someone at Harvard freaking out about two LP's in the first semester, so let's not pretend the bottom of Harvard's class is totally indistinguishable.

BruceWayne wrote:I'm not saying it's worth $200K, but those of you trying to make it seem like no way of discerning median from bottom of the class at HYS vs. good a old fashioned 4.0 GPA scale isn't a big deal are either crazy or 0Ls. It's a huge freaking deal. It basically means you can't end up in a situation where you absolutely cannot get a job immediately after graduation. It's the most important thing in law school period. What exactly do you think would be more important in determining what school to attend?

It works the same way at Columbia with profs required to give nothing below a B. We've also got a thread in the employment forum with someone at Harvard freaking out about two LP's in the first semester, so let's not pretend the bottom of Harvard's class is totally indistinguishable.

Even all P's at these schools is clearly below median right?

If there is less stress it is probably because even the bottom can get some biglawish option right?

But IMO the sort of person who gets into HYS is naturally a striver and won't stop. These guys aren't going to happy with a Dentons NYC offer.

BruceWayne wrote:I'm not saying it's worth $200K, but those of you trying to make it seem like no way of discerning median from bottom of the class at HYS vs. good a old fashioned 4.0 GPA scale isn't a big deal are either crazy or 0Ls. It's a huge freaking deal. It basically means you can't end up in a situation where you absolutely cannot get a job immediately after graduation. It's the most important thing in law school period. What exactly do you think would be more important in determining what school to attend?

It works the same way at Columbia with profs required to give nothing below a B. We've also got a thread in the employment forum with someone at Harvard freaking out about two LP's in the first semester, so let's not pretend the bottom of Harvard's class is totally indistinguishable.

Even all P's at these schools is clearly below median right?

If there is less stress it is probably because even the bottom can get some biglawish option right?

But IMO the sort of person who gets into HYS is naturally a striver and won't stop. These guys aren't going to happy with a Dentons NYC offer.

At Harvard. Agree that the striver who chooses Harvard isn't going to stop striving once they get here. But I do think the P/H thing makes it better. Besides the confuse the employer aspect, it helps two ways:1. Instead of aiming for top 5% of students taking the exam you only need to aim for top 30%. Yes grades are unpredictable and you can't know how you'll do til you've done it, but there is a psychological benefit.2. As long as you are confident you won't be in LP range (which is usually like 3), you can take a class off. So you can say "I'm just gonna take the P in torts and focus my resources elsewhere." If you're afraid of the B/B+ whatever, you can't take a class off.

Sucks for the person with two LPs, but that is legitimately bottom ~5%. It's true that straight P's are going to give people a "oh no!" Life moment however. I don't have anything to say for that bu strivers gonna strive.

BruceWayne wrote:I'm not saying it's worth $200K, but those of you trying to make it seem like no way of discerning median from bottom of the class at HYS vs. good a old fashioned 4.0 GPA scale isn't a big deal are either crazy or 0Ls. It's a huge freaking deal. It basically means you can't end up in a situation where you absolutely cannot get a job immediately after graduation. It's the most important thing in law school period. What exactly do you think would be more important in determining what school to attend?

It works the same way at Columbia with profs required to give nothing below a B. We've also got a thread in the employment forum with someone at Harvard freaking out about two LP's in the first semester, so let's not pretend the bottom of Harvard's class is totally indistinguishable.

Even all P's at these schools is clearly below median right?

If there is less stress it is probably because even the bottom can get some biglawish option right?

But IMO the sort of person who gets into HYS is naturally a striver and won't stop. These guys aren't going to happy with a Dentons NYC offer.

At Harvard. Agree that the striver who chooses Harvard isn't going to stop striving once they get here. But I do think the P/H thing makes it better. Besides the confuse the employer aspect, it helps two ways:1. Instead of aiming for top 5% of students taking the exam you only need to aim for top 30%. Yes grades are unpredictable and you can't know how you'll do til you've done it, but there is a psychological benefit.2. As long as you are confident you won't be in LP range (which is usually like 3), you can take a class off. So you can say "I'm just gonna take the P in torts and focus my resources elsewhere." If you're afraid of the B/B+ whatever, you can't take a class off.

Sucks for the person with two LPs, but that is legitimately bottom ~5%. It's true that straight P's are going to give people a "oh no!" Life moment however. I don't have anything to say for that bu strivers gonna strive.

The fallacy here that Tiaggo referred to (as rendered instructively by BitterBruce) is that a student at "CCN" is concerned about a B/B+ (Or the equivalent at Chicago) for their economic livelihood in a way a harvard student with all P's doesn't have to be. Sure, at some point 1L everyone loses their shit and has little freakouts about a median/below median note. But Folks never see an honors (A range) grade during 1L and still summer at great firms. Same with straight P's or 9P 1H. You only have to aim for top 5% at TTTs.. Were not comparing Stanford and Golden Gate. Top 30% at Chicago means V5 if you want it and an D.Ct art III with the right recs to boot. The existential fear of unemployment in 2014-2015 (unlike c/o 2012, for example) really only hits the very bottom of the class -- someone with 2 LPs, or a couple discretionary B-.

I can see how just taking a P with 70% of your peers would be reassuring as opposed to B or B+, since those are different. That's solid.

Things are probably still different at Georgetown, sure. But if you look at the actual numbers it should dispel this legend-of-the-letter-grade.

Because a student with qualifications for SBS (like Instinctive) is presumably more qualified and employable than any law student. It's far more competitive admissions than YLS (although couched in the joint degree probably less so). This provides a serious leg up for seeking non-law employment while pursuing your JD.

My guess is social entrepreneurship, which is pretty vibrant at Stanford's B-School even relative to other top B-schools. Although I am not sure whether it really changes the world or just makes the people involved sleep better at night.

jbagelboy wrote:The fallacy here that Tiaggo referred to (as rendered instructively by BitterBruce) is that a student at "CCN" is concerned about a B/B+ (Or the equivalent at Chicago) for their economic livelihood in a way a harvard student with all P's doesn't have to be. Sure, at some point 1L everyone loses their shit and has little freakouts about a median/below median note. But Folks never see an honors (A range) grade during 1L and still summer at great firms. Same with straight P's or 9P 1H. You only have to aim for top 5% at TTTs.. Were not comparing Stanford and Golden Gate. Top 30% at Chicago means V5 if you want it and an D.Ct art III with the right recs to boot. The existential fear of unemployment in 2014-2015 (unlike c/o 2012, for example) really only hits the very bottom of the class -- someone with 2 LPs, or a couple discretionary B-. I can see how just taking a P with 70% of your peers would be reassuring as opposed to B or B+, since those are different. That's solid.Things are probably still different at Georgetown, sure. But if you look at the actual numbers it should dispel this legend-of-the-letter-grade.

You are one of those people that I really don't like 1Ls to talk to because, although you mean no harm, you are so blissfully unaware of what happens to people who get B- grades (or that they aren't even this rare occurrence that you try to make them out to be) that you give people an overly secure sense of what will happen to them.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT BEING CONCERNED ABOUT GETTTING A MEDIAN (i.e. B/B+) TYPE GRADE. No kidding people at CCN aren't worried about getting a B/B+ type grade vs. what would probably happen at Yale, Stanford, and to a lesser extent Harvard. Really that's not what you should be that worried about at any of the top 14. Median grades won't finish you one way or the other at any top 14. I'm talking about getting B- type grades because those will. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT GETTING THAT TYPE OF GRADE AT ALL from Yale and Stanford. That is HUGE. In other words a median Stanford student looks EXACTLY the same on paper as one with B- type grades. Do you understand the difference in employment between a Stanford student at the bottom of the class who looks like the same as a median SLS student, vs. a CCN student with B- or worse grades on their transcript? The former can pull BIGLAW in most major markets and even a secondary that they have ties to. The latter will be lucky to be EMPLOYED. In other words, this could be the difference between being employed AT ALL or not. That's why the gap between HYS and CCN is really the most important one in the top 14. Again I'm not saying it's worth $200k. But it's really the only separation in rankings where you can almost definitively say one group of schools guarantees employment while the other doesn't. You can never really say that. But that's as close to it as you're going to get. Stanford and Yale have basically set up the best system possible for their students. The division is basically "Top Stanford/Yale students and Stanford/Yale Students". Schools that use a 4.0 scale have a system where employers are now dividing up students by the decimal. Now one B- suddenly makes you a leper in the eyes of employers while they're hiring someone who got a 2 Bs instead. Do you understand how razor thin of a margin for error that is? It sucks. But it 's law school. Avoiding that is worth a lot (but maybe not $200K).

People need to stop acting like the curve doesn't exist once you hit the median. Sorry but the median isn't a floor--contrary to TLS lore.

Now in fairness I forgot about the LPs at HLS so that's why I backtracked on grouping them with Yale and SLS for this issue. But honestly it's still better than a B- from CCN. It's bad, but I know from personal experience that it's still not as bad.

Last edited by BruceWayne on Tue Feb 10, 2015 1:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

EIP strikeouts here happen because of bad bidding, bad interviewing, or just really bad luck (yes, that still happens, though the bad luck people tend to be OK by the time 2L summer hits)

But, the easiest/fastest way to laugh off your post is that below median people end up with jobs at CLS. Are they the same job they'd get out of Harvard or Stanford? No clue. But I don't get the "you're guaranteed a job at H but not at C" thing. It doesn't pan out in the numbers.

utahraptor wrote:(1) I thought you went to UVA, Bruce. Am I wrong on that?

(2) B-s are only given by a couple of professors at CLS.

(3) You can get a B- and still get a job.

EIP strikeouts here happen because of bad bidding, bad interviewing, or just really bad luck (yes, that still happens, though the bad luck people tend to be OK by the time 2L summer hits)

But, the easiest/fastest way to laugh off your post is that below median people end up with jobs at CLS. Are they the same job they'd get out of Harvard or Stanford? No clue. But I don't get the "you're guaranteed a job at H but not at C" thing. It doesn't pan out in the numbers.

1) Yes but I know someone who went to one of the schools I mentioned with said grades

2) This may well be true and if so it's brilliant on CLS' part. But I hope it is literally true and not "I don't have any friends in my group at CLS who got one".

And that last comment was dumb as hell because it's making a straw man argument. No shit some below median people land jobs at CLS. Some below median people at American land jobs. The bottom line is what happens to MOST people who pull off those grades. MOST people who land a few B-s are NOT GETTING BIGLAW.

And, just because you're being a bit of a jerk to a poster I like, dude, BW, isn't this whole thing about you striking out? Do you blame your grades? I feel like there's some strange justification going on and I've never fully understood it. I'm not saying it to be a jerk—I just feel like you give bad advice, and you give it with a fervor that isn't really matched right now.

look at it in terms of insurance, dude

how much insurance are you purchasing with that money?

Your argument right now is that

BruceWayne wrote:MOST people who land a few B-s are NOT GETTING BIGLAW.

how many people is that? Seriously, how many people are we talking about? There are something like 30-40 EIP strikeouts from CLS these days. It's a real number. It should be considered.

But, not all of those people are striking out because of bad grades. In fact, from what I can tell, relatively few people are.

The idea of "a few" B-s is itself baffling to me. Here that wouldn't be a bad grade or two, it would mean that you have a good shot at being the bottom person in the class.

How much are you willing to spend on insurance for that? How confident are you that the bottom student at Harvard is actually BIGLAW secure and is absolutely incapable of getting a job at CLS?

The whole "making a difference" thing is obviously a load of crap, sold by law school administrators who want to make getting a law degree sound like something other than a putative route to a respectable professional identity.

Paul Campos wrote:The whole "making a difference" thing is obviously a load of crap, sold by law school administrators who want to make getting a law degree sound like something other than a putative route to a respectable professional identity.

BruceWayne wrote:I'm not saying it's worth $200K, but those of you trying to make it seem like no way of discerning median from bottom of the class at HYS vs. good a old fashioned 4.0 GPA scale isn't a big deal are either crazy or 0Ls. It's a huge freaking deal. It basically means you can't end up in a situation where you absolutely cannot get a job immediately after graduation. It's the most important thing in law school period. What exactly do you think would be more important in determining what school to attend?

The other big thing, that many people are brushing over, is that it makes a huge difference if you don't want to work in NYC. Again I wouldn't pay $200k for it but your ability to go somewhere like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Chicago (obviously not for UChicago), Florida, Seattle, Charlotte etc. is going to decrease big time by going to "CCN" over HYS. A lot of secondary markets don't even give you a boost for attending "CCN" over another top 14--especially if the region has a top 14 nearby. Actually DC falls into that category as well although it's still not easy from HYS.

From personal experience, this is patently false, particularly for markets like Atlanta, Charlotte, and D.C. It's just false, there is a massive difference between Columbia or Chicago over Georgetown or Michigan or Cornell. Not even close. If anything, Chicago and COlumbia are viewed more favorably in those markets than Stanford, and there are certainly better alumni connections.

Utahraptor I'm sorry I didn't realize just how much you have no idea what you're talking about. But I appreciate you being considerate and outing yourself with the following. The "who actually gets B- grades" line basically seals the deal. At least I know not to waste my time by responding to the majority of what you post. But yes I'm sorry forgive me "no one gets B- type grades" and so it's not worth thinking about--carry on.

utahraptor wrote:how many people is that? Seriously, how many people are we talking about? There are something like 30-40 EIP strikeouts from CLS these days. It's a real number. It should be considered.But, not all of those people are striking out because of bad grades. In fact, from what I can tell, relatively few people are.The idea of "a few" B-s is itself baffling to me. Here that wouldn't be a bad grade or two, it would mean that you have a good shot at being the bottom person in the class. How much are you willing to spend on insurance for that? How confident are you that the bottom student at Harvard is actually BIGLAW secure and is absolutely incapable of getting a job at CLS?

utahraptor wrote:

Paul Campos wrote:The whole "making a difference" thing is obviously a load of crap, sold by law school administrators who want to make getting a law degree sound like something other than a putative route to a respectable professional identity.

It's not quite as ridiculous as pitching an MBA that way though.

I really respect this answer.

No joke.

FlamingDragon wrote:

BruceWayne wrote:I'm not saying it's worth $200K, but those of you trying to make it seem like no way of discerning median from bottom of the class at HYS vs. good a old fashioned 4.0 GPA scale isn't a big deal are either crazy or 0Ls. It's a huge freaking deal. It basically means you can't end up in a situation where you absolutely cannot get a job immediately after graduation. It's the most important thing in law school period. What exactly do you think would be more important in determining what school to attend?

The other big thing, that many people are brushing over, is that it makes a huge difference if you don't want to work in NYC. Again I wouldn't pay $200k for it but your ability to go somewhere like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Chicago (obviously not for UChicago), Florida, Seattle, Charlotte etc. is going to decrease big time by going to "CCN" over HYS. A lot of secondary markets don't even give you a boost for attending "CCN" over another top 14--especially if the region has a top 14 nearby. Actually DC falls into that category as well although it's still not easy from HYS.

From personal experience, this is patently false, particularly for markets like Atlanta, Charlotte, and D.C. It's just false, there is a massive difference between Columbia or Chicago over Georgetown or Michigan or Cornell. Not even close. If anything, Chicago and COlumbia are viewed more favorably in those markets than Stanford, and there are certainly better alumni connections.

You are on some other shit if you think that Atlanta or Charlotte firms are pining for students from those schools you mentioned over the latter ones. I promise you I have more experience than you do on that and there are SEVERAL regular posters on TLS who can EASILY laugh that notion out of the thread. Actually you're off even with D.C. They really don't care; they are incredibly grade focused when it comes to picking students from any top 14. They don't really favor any schools after HYS although it is easy to interview with a lot of the firms when you are at GULC and UVA for obvious reasons. Other than that no just no. Texas would have actually been the market to highlight out of the secondaries for your argument.

Too many students with moderate to no experience with actually getting a job answer these types of threads (usually basing their info off of the latest U.S. News reports).

Something JCougar pointed out some time ago that a lot of current law students and 0Ls don't understand is that in a lot of ways, once you fall below the median at your respective non HYS top 14, you just lose a lot of the "top law school" sheen that a lot of 0Ls base their school choice on. I'm not saying you're suddenly seen as someone who attended a run of the mill school. But a lot of the distinctions that 0Ls like to make in regards to say "CCN" vs. whatever other group etc. just fades. These firms have general cut-offs that they follow and once you fall below them you're just kind of out on your own looking for whatever happens to pop up.

A B- is a discretionary grade at CLS. Most professors do not give them out at all. Some do. One 1L professor gives out C range grades.

These things aren't hyperbole—people know which professors give out the discretionary grades, and which don't.

This isn't "no one gets a B-" but rather "very, very few people get more than one." The odds just don't pan out. It isn't "who gets B- grades" but, "knowing the curve and that B- grades aren't part of the mandatory curve" how many people fall in that range?

You are, quite literally, talking about a handful of students. I'd be surprised if there were more than 10 1Ls with more than one B-. If you have magic information indicating otherwise, I'd like to see it, but that's my impression as a student here.

Moreover, again, we're talking about 30-40 strikeouts—how many strikeouts are there at Harvard? It's non-zero, I'd assume (and if you can show that it is zero, again, props, would love to see that data).

I'm willing to talk numbers.

You're just angry (still) and giving bad advice based on your personal situation—a personal situation at another school, with zero applicability to this choice. Let's talk numbers, or let's not talk at all.

BruceWayne wrote:Utahraptor I'm sorry I didn't realize just how much you have no idea what you're talking about. But I appreciate you being considerate and outing yourself with the following. The "who actually gets B- grades" line basically seals the deal. At least I know not to waste my time by responding to the majority of what you post. But yes I'm sorry forgive me "no one gets B- type grades" and so it's not worth thinking about--carry on.

[other off topic shit]

Bruce, dude. How can you still be missing this point. I'm sorry your school gave out a lot of B- and C and that made the "no grades" DS/H/P/LP schematic appealing. I'm sorry a lot of kids struck out in your year at OCI, many years ago. That's not true at CLS, and that's not the market we have right now. Professors don't have to give out B- or C and very few students get them. I don't think it's true at Chicago either. I had three of the most notorious professors at the school for giving out B- as a 1L (Lynch, Kraus and Rapa for anyone who thinks I'm bullshitting you) and I saw the grade breakdowns, there were less than eight given out to several hundred students.

The kids I know who came closest to striking out or in previous years who actually did strike out did not do so because of grades. Understand that we aren't arguing you definitely won't strike out by attending these schools. If you're a terrible interviewer with zero profile you can strike out anywhere. We're saying your B- and below kills you line is obsolete in some circumstances. You have to stop perpetuating this fantasy that there's this huge drop off in risk because it's far more dangerous than any of our schticks: it seeps into the minds of 0Ls and gives them the conscious or unconscious impression that a one spot difference in us news and world report means anything more than that. Even if you gloss it over in caveats ("I'm not saying it's worth $200K") it causes people to make stupid financial decisions based on the antiquated impressions from a raving former law student online about relative grading structures.

I'm sorry guys; I didn't realize no one gets B-s/ends up bottom 1/3 or worse (or that CLS was the only school that this thread was discussing) and that the economy had completely turned around since the dark ages of 2 years ago (and apparently for the people I knew who graduated last year as well). You definitely have more experience with getting a job and legal hiring than I do. I guess they eliminated that bottom 1/3 of the class possibility for students who graduated within the last year or so. A lot of people really screwed up by not waiting to attend law school after they made these new changes. Carry on.

Also I didn't mean to post all that off topic shit about how hiring works for students who land below the median and how school choice affects getting a job in non NYC markets--again my apologies. I didn't mean to distract from explaining how absurd it is to think that someone could land bottom 1/3 grades. Let alone how it could cause them to end up unemployed.

Last edited by BruceWayne on Tue Feb 10, 2015 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

BruceWayne wrote:I'm sorry guys I didn't realize no one gets B-s/ends up bottom 1/3 or worse (or that CLS was the only school that this thread was discussing) and that the economy had completely turned around since the dark ages of 2 years ago (and apparently for the people I knew who graduated last year as well). You definitely have more experience with getting a job and legal hiring than I do. I guess they eliminated that bottom 1/3 of the class for students who graduated within the last year or so. A lot of people really screwed up by not waiting to attend law school after they made these new changes. Carry on.

Dude, TBF, you are the one who has emphasized the difference between YHS and CLS in this thread. Smaug was just pointing out that being below median at CLS might not be as drastic as you thought.

BruceWayne wrote:I'm sorry guys I didn't realize no one gets B-s/ends up bottom 1/3 or worse (or that CLS was the only school that this thread was discussing) and that the economy had completely turned around since the dark ages of 2 years ago (and apparently for the people I knew who graduated last year as well). You definitely have more experience with getting a job and legal hiring than I do. I guess they eliminated that bottom 1/3 of the class possibility for students who graduated within the last year or so. A lot of people really screwed up by not waiting to attend law school after they made these new changes. Carry on.

BruceWayne wrote:I'm sorry guys; I didn't realize no one gets B-s/ends up bottom 1/3 or worse (or that CLS was the only school that this thread was discussing) and that the economy had completely turned around since the dark ages of 2 years ago (and apparently for the people I knew who graduated last year as well). You definitely have more experience with getting a job and legal hiring than I do. I guess they eliminated that bottom 1/3 of the class possibility for students who graduated within the last year or so. A lot of people really screwed up by not waiting to attend law school after they made these new changes. Carry on.

your sarcasm aside, when there's an 86-92% documented success rate for large firms at 2L OCI, not including the increasing number of students who abstain from OCI and find SAs through contacts or mass mail to avoid career services, and the fact that the strike-outs are distributed throughout the class, I'm pretty comfortable that many students in the bottom third of the class are doing alright. I'm not eliminating them: they're included in those statistics.